Salvation Theology of Catholic and Orthodox Christians

[GaryTaylor]

Oh, almost forgot, which sin is that mentioned at Orange, Original or Ancestral? I believe we need to note where we are all in agreement. Case we need to back up.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I read the link. I see a lot of affirmations with Catholic soteriology.

And I also see many misunderstandings about Augustine and what he said.

I also see a lot of confusion with what Augustine wrote and how it was later picked apart and misinterpreted by the Western reformers, Calvin and Luther, to justify their heresies.

I keep seeing the charge of legalism, but I don’t see any proof.

I do have a question as far as the fall. The EO say that the result of the Fall was death, not the guilt, the woundedness, that by sinning death was a result,“for the wages of sin is death.”

How is it that one was passed on to Adam’s progeny and not the other?

The reason I ask is one, because of Romans 5: [12] Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned –
[13] sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law.

I’ve heard of a principle before where Jewish priests even down to the latest of the lines were said to be “sons of” the head of the line, beit Aaron, Zadok, or even Melchezedek.

As is in Hebrews 7:[5] And those descendants of Levi who receive the priestly office have a commandment in the law to take tithes from the people, that is, from their brethren, though these also are descended from Abraham.
[6] But this man who has not their genealogy received tithes from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises.
[7] It is beyond dispute that the inferior is blessed by the superior.
[8] Here tithes are received by mortal men; there, by one of whom it is testified that he lives.
[9] **One might even say that Levi himself, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham,
[10] for he was still in the loins of his ancestor when Melchiz’edek met him. **

So, wouldn’t be consistent to consider that, if by this principle, all men were in Adam’s loins when he first disobeyed God? And since, according to this principle, we sinned with Adam; his guilt and sin is our guilt and sin. Therefore we all reeceived the wages of the sin: death?

I like the thinking.

Extrinsic guilt, not personally guilty, but as in injustice guilty. Nevertheless the injustice in there, as is the sentence, or better put, a learning experience to push upward in cooperation with grace. The paradox, sinners who must not sin. The perpetual dilemma for man. the world or God.

 

[1Tim215Mommy]

Well, then again I wish you could define it so that I could understand. The Catholic teaching on this is by no means impersonal, not to my estimation. In fact I consider it quite profound.

Your posts are really confusing to me. First you said that Catholics don’t believe in the Beatific Vision. Next you said that Catholics do believe in Beatific Vision. Now you say Catholics believe in something different & more profound than a Beatific Vision - which again literally means “Seeing Blessedness”. I think I need to get my information about Catholic belief from a different poster who can keep a straight story.

 

[1Tim215Mommy]

Good topic.

:crying: the thread was derailed :crying:

I wanted to learn more about Salvation, our Future, within the two Churches but instead everyone else seems content discussing Ancestral/Original Sin, the Past.

Majority wins! I’m the loser.

Someone pm me if this thread manages to get back to the Topic of our Future, Salvation.

 

[GaryTaylor]

:crying: the thread was derailed :crying:

I wanted to learn more about Salvation, our Future, within the two Churches but instead everyone else seems content discussing Ancestral/Original Sin, the Past.

Majority wins! I’m the loser.

Someone pm me if this thread manages to get back to the Topic of our Future, Salvation.

I have it right here for you.

google.com/url?q=http://www.catholictreasury.info/books/everlasting_life/ev11.php&sa=U&ei=nrNrTtzkK47egQf96ozdBQ&ved=0CBgQFjAB&usg=AFQjCNEqZgzEjj08uBFLX_Ytv7bsfMqIgA

 

[1Tim215Mommy]

I have it right here for you.

google.com/url?q=http://www.catholictreasury.info/books/everlasting_life/ev11.php&sa=U&ei=nrNrTtzkK47egQf96ozdBQ&ved=0CBgQFjAB&usg=AFQjCNEqZgzEjj08uBFLX_Ytv7bsfMqIgA

Thank You:extrahappy::dancing:

Part 5 section 27 says that the Catholic Salvation doctrine is that the one saved will be able to see with their inuitive and facial eyes the Divine Essence of God. And they will look at Him forever.

It does seem quite different than Theosis.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Then as to Thomas Aquinas you can breeze though this…

newadvent.org/summa/1012.htm

Comprehending and knowing the infinite God, in His infinite essence, well. that seems to be where the misunderstanding is.

The privilege is to see what your allowed to see, and as you are able to see. To see would correspond with knowing/comprehension. In other words there is a distinction between Gods essence and energies.

 

[1Tim215Mommy]

Then as to Thomas Aquinas you can breeze though this…

newadvent.org/summa/1012.htm

Comprehending and knowing the infinite God, in His infinite essence, well. that seems to be where the misunderstanding is.

The privilege is to see what your allowed to see, and as you are able to see. To see would correspond with knowing/comprehension. In other words there is a distinction between Gods essence and energies.

enter confusion. Are you saying that the initial link you gave was wrong & Thomas Aquinas is right or visa versa?

The first link you gave said that God can been seen physically & intuitively/known in His Divine Essence - a quote from Pope Benedict XII used to explain the Catholic doctrine of Salvation.

 

[chimo]

Beatific Vision and Theosis

What are the similarities? and What are the differences?

There is no difference. Both Churches have their saints but in order for God to make saints in either Church there seems to be two processes which can be seen in the two Churches. The process in the West seems to be more in the line of involving suffering to speed up the process of deification. Here we see that many of the Catholic saints can be seen as very young. Why? It is simply that God had speed up the process towards their own “theosis”. Can God actually do this? Sure He can as He responds to certain undeserved sufferings, tribulations and sickness so He can send to someone an increase amount of Graces which means more of the Holy Spirit. This process is called Redemptive Suffering in the West. It is very closely connected to the Sufferings and Passion our Lord went through. The Catholic saint or anyone can actually be more defied through this process in much quicker fashion. In the East the process was more a gradual process done through many ascetical struggles which in time won the person to a more presence of grace within. This is why most Orthodox and Eastern saints were much older. It just took more time that’s all. The differences in the two processes was that God used the process in making saints younger in the Catholic Church through more of the Redemptive process and in the East it was more as I called it the “transfigured process”. This doesn’t mean God can’t use the two processes at the same time and in both Churches. Sure He can. Soon you will see younger Orthodox saints when God will use the Redemptive process on them. And you will see older Catholic saints once they discover the Orthodox way of asceticism. The Passion is seen more pronounced in the West. The East was more concerned with “transfiguration”. That is why many Catholic saints were given the gift of the stigmata. Yet soon the Lord will enjoy the Orthodox to be developed as does the Catholic saint so that soon some Orthodox saints will also be gifted with the stigmata. You see the differences really come down in how God approaches you or in some how you will approach God.

 

[GaryTaylor]

enter confusion. Are you saying that the initial link you gave was wrong & Thomas Aquinas is right or visa versa?

The first link you gave said that God can been seen physically & intuitively/known in His Divine Essence - a quote from Pope Benedict XII used to explain the Catholic doctrine of Salvation.

No there is no right and wrong, confusion occurs East/West as what is stated and what is meant by what is stated. The East use’s the Essence/Energies theology. So as above with chimo its a matter of proper understanding of both to understand the compatibility.

 

[ConstantineTG]

You said there is this large difference. Then you should be able to articulate this, not I for you. Your not even sure if or what was transmitted here.

Who said I am not sure? In Orthodoxy nothing in transmitted, in Catholicism the stain of original sin is.

 

[ConstantineTG]

All this was answered there is no guilt which was answered and shown in the CCC… You need to either show this, or admit per the CCC you are wrong. Its that simple.

Stain was addressed above either acknowledge what was said or elaborate. Your becoming “circular” already, which means your “grasping”…

How about you explain the East perspective of Mary and the Incarnation according to the 4th Council posted. And the Ancestral Sin which Mary was subjected to. Then we could compare the two.

You’re the only one who’s circular here, we’ve had this discussion dozens of times and everytime you address me its the same question as if we’re talking for the first time. Frankly, it’s tiring. And most of your posts make no sense. I’m being honest here, not mean.

 

[GaryTaylor]

In Orthodoxy nothing in transmitted

OK, if you say so. Course that’s not what the Apostle states, But I’ll take you on your word.

“Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned”

You guys are not part of that?

 

[ConstantineTG]

More stuff to read: synaxis.org/orthodoxcathsalvation.htm

oca.org/questions/teaching/st.-augustine-original-sin

 

[ConstantineTG]

OK, if you say so. Course that’s not what the Apostle states, But I’ll take you on your word.

“Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned”

You guys are not part of that?

Again, for the Nth time, sin as taught by the Apostles and Fathers of the Church is corruption, not just faults and offenses. All have sinned means all are corrupted, not that all are guilty of an offense.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I just want to know does what the apostle state above apply to the Orthodox Church?

YES or NO?

 

[1Tim215Mommy]

No there is no right and wrong, confusion occurs East/West as what is stated and what is meant by what is stated. The East use’s the Essence/Energies theology. So as above with chimo its a matter of proper understanding of both to understand the compatibility.

Help me understand.

You’ve given me a link that said that the Catholic doctrine is that those saved will see/know God’s Essence through a quote from Pope Benedict XII. Is this in fact correct “Catholic” teaching?

You’ve given another link for Thomas Aquinas, a known Catholic Saint, who you said claimed God’s Essence is unknowable. Is this in fact correct “Catholic” teaching?

Now you’re telling me that neither is right & neither is wrong when it comes to “Catholic” teaching on Salvation?

Help me understand. I’m just an Orthodox Christian trying to understand what the Catholic Church teaches on Salvation to learn what the similarities and differences are from the Orthodox Church.

 

[GaryTaylor]

CTG you guys agreed to this, are you saying “you” disagree?

CANON 2. If anyone asserts that Adam’s sin affected him alone and not his descendants also, or at least if he declares that it is only the death of the body which is the punishment for sin, and not also that sin, which is the death of the soul, passed through one man to the whole human race, he does injustice to God and contradicts the Apostle, who says, “Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned” (Rom. 5:12).
Council of Orange 529’AD

 

[1Tim215Mommy]

CTG you guys agreed to this, are you saying “you” disagree?

CANON 2. If anyone asserts that Adam’s sin affected him alone and not his descendants also, or at least if he declares that it is only the death of the body which is the punishment for sin, and not also that sin, which is the death of the soul, passed through one man to the whole human race, he does injustice to God and contradicts the Apostle, who says, “Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned” (Rom. 5:12).
Council of Orange 529’AD

I know I am now commenting on the derailed portion of this thread, but are you aware that Council of Orange in France (the West) is not an Ecumenical Council?

 

[GaryTaylor]

Now you’re telling me that neither is right & neither is wrong when it comes to “Catholic” teaching on Salvation?

This is a conclusion you’ve drawn, not I.

I said there is no right and wrong in the two between East and West. Agree’d?